“Since the world is world, the invisible of God, that is, His eternal
power and His divinity, result
visible to the one who reflects on
His works, so he has no apology. ”
Romans 1: 19-20
- To me, that there are other planes or other dimensions or other worlds, or whatever you want to call it, it seems all pure talk.
- Why?
- Because, put to invent, it is possible to affirm everything, right?
- Sure. But that does not prove that they do not exist, but that you do not believe in them.
- Of course not. But, if I don't see them, they don't exist.
- Oh yeah?
- Sure! Do you think that, because someone tells me that they see another dimension, I already have to believe it and, consequently, I have to believe that there is everything that this person claims to see?
- No. You are free to believe it or not.
- But how am I going to believe something that I don't know? What do you think I have the five senses for? And the head?
- What do you think you have your head for?
- What do you mean?
- Well, I want to say that, although it is true that the senses, which we have been developing in this three-dimensional world, over millions of years, give us news of how much it exists on the one hand, we do not know if, Beyond those senses, there is something we do not perceive and, on the other, reason tells us that this is very possible to occur.
- Does that tell you the reason? How?
- Well, just using it.
- You mean by that I am not using it?
- I want to say that, in this matter specifically, you don't seem to use it properly.
- And why?
- Because you have not rationally studied the problem and yet you have drawn conclusions, so those conclusions cannot be rational.
- I say: I have five senses that are my means of information about the outside world; Therefore, what they tell me is what is there. And they tell me that there are three dimensions: Length, width and height. Then, if there is not, according to my data, more than three dimensions, I should not accept, for example, a fourth dimension, simply because my senses do not tell me that it exists or, rather, they tell me that it does not exist. Do you think all this is unreasonable?
- Man, it's a reasoning, say, to walk around the house. To handle you, in that sense, enough. But to seriously discuss the issue or to give an opinion with certain guarantees, you have to study the matter and deepen it. Or is it not?
Why?
Because your own experience is continually showing you that there is something more than those three dimensions.
Ah, s ?
Yes.
Give me an example.
Not one. I can put you hundreds. There goes one: You feel love for your children, don't you?
Yes, of course.
But is it a real love or an imagination of yours?
It is a real love.
Existing?
Of course.
And how long is it long, wide and tall?
Man !. That is not measured that way.
Why not?
Because it is a feeling and we are talking about physical things.
Are you talking about yourself. Of course, if you only look at the view, there is only what you see; if in the ear, there is only what you hear, if in the sense of smell, only what do you smell?
Yes.
And what others see and hear and smell does not exist?
- Yeah right.
- And what you or the others see or hear or smell, what dimensions does it have?
- Good. I recognize that I have spent a little. Yes. There are things that do not have three dimensions. Rather, there are things that have no dimensions.
- Do not have dimensions?
- No. What dimensions can a feeling or song have, for example?
- Using the mind, it could be said, at first sight, that they have no dimension, or that they have four or five or more, right? Because, what is clear is that they are neither long nor wide nor tall.
- Yes. But why do you say "at first sight".
- Because that is what one has to conclude when beginning to study an issue using the intellect.
- At the beginning? What else can be done?
- It can be deepened.
- As?
- Studying it analogically.
- What do you mean by "analogically"?
- I'll give you other examples and you'll understand.
- In agreement.
- Imagine that your world was constituted by a line. It would be a world of one dimension, only length. Over millions of years you would have lived in that world and developed some senses that would faithfully inform you of what existed in it.
- Voucher.
- How would you react if some of your congeners assured that there is a second dimension, the width; that the world is not a line but a plane and that plane has two dimensions, length and width?
- Well, as my senses would not perceive more than the length, in principle I would deny the existence of the width and, therefore, that of a two-dimensional world.
- But you know that second dimension exists, right?
- Yes.
- And yet, you would deny it, based only on the testimony of your senses. Would it be a rational position?
- No. The rational thing, I admit, would be to confess that I did not see it, but that I could not, nor should I deny that possibility.
- Would it be a rational position to say that those who claimed to see the second dimension were crazy, just because you didn't see her?
- No. It would be totally illogical.
- In agreement. So let's move on to another world or another dimension, whatever you want to call it: You are now a being whose world is a plane and, therefore, has only two dimensions, length and width. And, for millions of years you have lived and evolved in it and have developed a series of senses that promptly inform you of how much it exists and happens, okay?
- In agreement.
- Could you perceive and, therefore, conceive, and consequently admit, the existence of a third dimension, "the high one"?
- No. My senses and my habit of trusting them and only theirs would prevent me.
- But, that third dimension exists, right?
- Yes, of course it exists.
- And you would deny it.
- Yes.
- And what would you do if some of your fellow men began to ensure that there is a third dimension, "the high one", and that, therefore, the world has three dimensions and that they perceived it that way?
- I would deny it, of course.
- Based on what?
- In that my senses would not perceive that third dimension.
- And would yours be a rational position?
- No. It wouldn't be.
- And what would be the rational position?
- Recognize that I did not see her, admit the possibility of her existence and do my best to sharpen my senses.
- As?
- Finding out which way or what procedure those who claimed to see that third dimension had used and, once known, putting them into practice. Only after that, I recognize it, would I be rationally authorized to affirm whether that third dimension existed or not.
Okay. Well, let's continue with our analogous reasoning. We arrive precisely where we are now: To the physical world, which we all know. A world of three dimensions: length, width and height. Only three, but always three. For millions of years we have been developing our five senses that, in our opinion, fully inform us of how much in our world there is and happens, right?
Yes.
And, regardless of what has been said, there are blind people who see nothing, and deaf people who hear nothing, and people without smell, and colorblind, and color blind and, despite If science has shown that insects perceive infrared and ultraviolet rays, and that dogs hear ultrasound, etc., what will happen, how will they react if there are people Does it tell you that there is a fourth or even a fifth dimension and that they perceive them?
I understand you perfectly. I will say, and that is what I did at the beginning of our conversation, that these dimensions, that those worlds do not exist, based only on the fact that I do not perceive them.
And will it be a rational position?
No. I admit it. The rational would be to find out exactly what they say and why they say it; then, find out what procedures they have used to sharpen their senses in this way or to make whatever they are born; then, put those methods into practice; and, only after that, would he be able to affirm, with a certain basis and a certain dose of reason, whether these worlds exist or not.
- Super. That is precisely what I intended you to see at the beginning of our dialogue.
- I recognize that you have convinced me. But now the question arises about how those worlds are with more dimensions than ours.
- I can not now describe all its peculiarities, which have been and are being investigated by many people who have acquired enough clairvoyance to do so. I will tell you, only that there is an etheric clairvoyance, therefore able to see the ethers and that it is similar to X-rays, since it allows to see through the bodies to the desired depth, as medicine does with the scanner, and can check if an organ malfunctions or has malformations or read a letter inside an envelope or discover a treasure no matter how hidden it is or see through a mountain, etc.
- Wonderful! And they don't use it?
- Of course they use it. But only to do good and never for their own benefit. These people are not interested in fame or power or wealth. That is why they have reached that faculty before the others.
- And what do the other worlds look like?
- The World of Desire has four dimensions, which means that when an object is viewed, it is seen, at the same time, from all angles and from the inside out. It is a complete and one-time vision of each object. And the World of Thought adds one more dimension.
- And what happens there?
- That, when we look at an object, such as that is the world of archetypes, what we really see is the archetype of that object and, not only do we see it completely in all its aspects, but that the object, that is, the archetype, He exposes his whole story in a second. If we look at a person's archetype, in the act we know her much better than she knows herself.
- It's amazing!
- Yes it is. But it is real. And anyone who intends and strives in this regard can see for himself.
- I do not quite understand how the different planes or world are situated. Could you clarify it for me?
- Yes. You will see: Imagine a great sphere, which is God, of very subtle matter that blends into everything within it. And imagine in its interior a series of successive layers, increasingly dense, which are the different waves of life, which are at all times intertwined by God and, therefore, "in Him live, move and have their being." Imagine that, as far as we are concerned, we are in the heart, in the densest part - although, it seems, there are worlds denser than ours that, for the moment we are not interested in - and, therefore, we are being empathized for all the less dense planes and their inhabitants. But imagine also that each plane, in addition to understanding the immediately inferior - and the less dense -, is larger than it, occupies more space, so that, for convenience and for better understanding, we refer to the worlds above and from below, the reality is not exactly that. It would be more accurate to say the internal worlds, insofar as they understand us but, at the same time, external ones, since they exceed us in size. That is the problem of trying to encompass worlds with more than three dimensions with a brain that has evolved in a world of only three.
SOURCE: “ What happens when we die? And then? ”By Francisco Manuel Nácher Lopez.
